--On 10. desember 2007 15:22 -0800 Ned Freed <ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2. The mailing lists described in 2821 are very simple redistribution
lists, as opposed to the "fairly sophisticated forums for group
communication" [2919] described in these documents. For simple
aliasing and redistribution lists, I think the "MUST be left
unchanged" is appropriate.
The key point is that this is redistribution prior to final delivery.
Sophisticated list processors in effect submit a new message to the
transport
infrastructure and do not fall under this prohibition.
Would it be a reasonable thing to add a note saying that "there exist
things that call themselves lists but are doing processing other than what
is described here; such lists should be described as delivery followed by a
submission, and alterations are therefore outside the rules"?
I'd also be happy with losing the normative language about what lists do
apart from replacing MAIL FROM; I don't see an upside to having the
prohibition in here for lists, since it doesn't match widespread practice.
(I do want to keep the prohibition for aliases!)
Now, having said this, the minor one issue I do see with section 3.10 is
that
the "lists MUST change the envelope from" requirement is actually a
tautology:
Lists as distinct from aliases as defined as redistributors that change
the
envelope from address. The requirement that lists do the one thing that
defines
them appears to have originated in the department of redundancy
department.
My memory claims that it originated in the department of terminology war
peace negotiations - when faced with having to come up with a definition of
"alias" and "list", the group settled for "if it alters MAIL FROM, it's a
list, if it doesn't, it's an alias". Thus, the real point of the section is
the terminology (he said, redundantly).
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf